My husband, out of the blue and at 4am, had the following conversation with me:

Him: Atheists have a religion.Me: Wait... what?Him: Atheists have a religion.Me. No we don't. How do you figure?Him: Because you believe in something.Me scratching my head: But in order to be religious, some sort of god has to be involved. Him: Not necessarily. You believe that nothing exists, therefore, you believe in something, which makes it a religion. Me: Okay that's stupid. I believe our cat Lece' has three colors. Some might argue she has four colors. That doesn't make my belief a religion. Him: People have worshiped cats. Me: What the hell does that have to do with Lece' having three colors?Him: Because she's a cat. Me: That makes no sense. Seriously. Where do you get this stuff?Him: All I'm saying is that because you believe in something, then you have a religion. Me: Allow me to enlighten you since obviously you haven't had enough coffee yet. For starters, speaking only for myself, I do not believe in the existence of a god, of any god. That has nothing, absolutely nothing to do with Lece' or the colors of her fur or worshiping of cats. Your thinking is wrong. Secondly, what is your definition of religion?Him: My definition of religion? It's all bullshit. Me: But you're Wiccan. Are you saying that your religion is bullshit? Him: Yes. Me: Why is that? Him: Because it is. Me: Oh for fucks sake. That is not an answer. If you feel that way about your own religion, then you might as well be atheist. Him: But that's still having a religion. Me: Back to this are we? No it's not. Atheists don't subscribe to any idea of any god. In order to be religious, typically, you'd believe there was a god, a deity of some sort. Him: Not necessarily. Me: How do you figure?Him: Religion is believing in something.Me: Oh it goes waaaay deeper than that dear. A god is involved in that thought process. I'm going to post this to my atheist forum and see what they think since this is utterly ridiculous. Him: Let me know what sort of shit storm I start.

We then leave so I can take him to work. I just got back. During the drive to his job, he says to me:

So now I assume you're going to throw this in my face every chance you get? Me: Uh no. Why would I do that? Him: Because I know you will. Me: Are you intentionally trying to piss me off by accusing me of something you think I might do in the future?Him: No. Me: Well, that's not very convincing. Already, you've assumed that I'm going to do that and yet all we were doing was having a discussion on the absurdity of your claim. I was trying to teach you that your view of atheism is incorrect, because well, it is. How do you figure that I'm going to continually use this against you? Him: Shrugs his shoulders and gives no answer. Me: Well, if I wanted to throw something in your face, it would be, for example, if I loaned you $300 two years ago and you haven't paid me and every time I see you, I mention how I did this great thing for you by lending you the money that I have yet to see back. THAT is throwing something in your face. Having a discussion on what atheism actually is, is NOT. Do you get it? Him: Whatever. I'm done with this and don't want to talk about it anymore. Me laughing: That's the sort of typical theist response I expect. You're proven wrong so you are done talking about it. Him: No. You just always have the need to be right all the time. Me: I didn't make the absurd claim that atheists have a religion. You did. But okay. We're done talking about it.

Atheism isn't even a belief, it's a lack of a belief. To say it is "believing in nothing" is an ignorant, presumptuous strawman. When people say this, they mean, "this is what I think the logical conclusion of atheism would be." Well too bad, you don't get to decide where atheism leads people sonny Jim.

I don't even get what kind of point people are trying to make. Even if atheism was a religion, so what? We're as stupid as them? Is that the argument? Because it's not a very good one. It's a desperate tu quoque from someone with no actual argument.

If they want to define religion so that it can include things like a lack of belief, so that not believing in dragons is a religion too, then they are using religion in a non-standard way. And it achieves nothing, except trying to muddy the waters as far as I can see.

Bullshit! Logical fallacies FTW! Send him over here and we'll set him straight.

I have a website here which discusses the issues and terminology surrounding religion and atheism. It's hopefully user friendly to all.

(10-04-2015 05:25 AM)Robvalue Wrote: Oh boy! What a load of crap! Sorry you have to put up with that

Atheism isn't even a belief, it's a lack of a belief.

I don't know, Rob, I think I know what you mean but I don't entirely agree with you, there. If I choose not to pray for forgiveness or whatever, that's because I believe that there is no such God. When I drive across a bridge I do it because I believe that it will hold. Maybe you define what you mean by "belief" differently from me.

I suppose with your way of saying it you want to emphasize that the burden of proof for such existence claims is on the one making the claim, and that's ok. I just find it confusing to deny that atheism is a belief. The question is, as always, whether a belief is justified.

To the OP: it's not very useful to equate belief with religion, that's why we have two separate words. If I turn the know on my stove when I want to boil water, it's because I believe that this action will let the stove heat up. Is this now a religion? No, of course not, that's complete nonsense.

Quantum Physics: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

I'd say you won that round, I don't know if you want to continue a dialog with this person, but you could ask how a lack of belief in gods requires faith.

It seems they're wanting to consider all beliefs bullshit, I can pretty much agree with that, but they lack clarity about what an atheist is. Perhaps he doesn't like the idea that he can't call your lack of belief bullshit like all of these other religions.

Why would this nonsense cause a shitstorm? This is the same shit we hear every day on this forum.

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition

It's a rejection of the claim "there is at least one God". To say you believe there is no God is to accept the opposite claim. They aren't the same thing. Like if I say I don't believe the claim that this coin will come up heads, I'm saying I don't have the evidence to draw that conclusion. I'm not saying I believe it won't come up heads, in other words, I believe it will come up tails. I don't believe either claim yet. I say I don't have enough evidence to say what will happen, or what is true.

The question isn't "do you believe there is a god or do you believe there isn't a god", that is two questions. I can believe neither I can say there isn't enough evidence to rule God in or out.

(10-04-2015 05:40 AM)Robvalue Wrote: No, it's not a belief. It's a rejection of the claim "there is at least one God". To say you believe there is to accept the opposite claim. They aren't the same thing.

When you choose to not pray to god to spare you eternal hellfire, whether you like it or not it's a decision based on your belief that there is no such place. No? Somehow you mean something much stronger by belief than I do, almost like absolute certainty.

Quantum Physics: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

But then again, I think I would mess with them, tell them you made this deity tester and no god, after praying to it, has turned the little cardboard disk on my tester 90 degrees like I requested in my test prayer.

Then I'd explain the lack of any evidence has caused me to conclude that there are no gods and I'd be glad to test his god(s) to disprove that one as well.

If he comes up with some excuse (And he will!) why that wouldn't work, then it's time to tell him to STFU until his god moves the little cardboard disk.

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition

(10-04-2015 05:40 AM)Robvalue Wrote: No, it's not a belief. It's a rejection of the claim "there is at least one God". To say you believe there is to accept the opposite claim. They aren't the same thing.

When you choose to not pray to god to spare you eternal hellfire, whether you like it or not it's a decision based on your belief that there is no such place. No? Somehow you mean something much stronger by belief than I do, almost like absolute certainty.

I'm saying that to be an atheist does not require you to believe there is no God. You can think it is 50/50. You're not convinced it is true or false. So you may do stuff just in case it's true. Just being an atheist does not tell you whether someone goes as far as to believe there is no God. As it happens I personally believe that, yes, but a pure agnostic in the middle would not. They are undecided so that will be reflected in their actions.

To reject a claim is to say you don't believe the claim to be true, it doesn't mean you believe the claim to be false.

I have a website here which discusses the issues and terminology surrounding religion and atheism. It's hopefully user friendly to all.